Hawkster1

I seem frequently to encounter partners who give a jump shift response to my opening of 1 in a suit. E.G: 1-♣,pass, 2-♥ or ♠; 1-♦, pass, 2-♥ or ♠; 1-♥, pass, 2-♠; etc. Frequently the responder will have 6 cards in his or her bid suit, a few points, but not much else. What is the rationale for this response? It seems almost never to be helpful. It used to be that a jump shift would indicate a VERY GOOD hand; and the theory was that one gives up a round of bidding to make subsequent bidding easier. However, I see no theoretical basis for a jump shift with essentially a trash hand and six cards in the suit. Can someone who uses this response, as I have described it, explain why you think it is helpful? I understand that it makes a bid more difficult for the opponent who has not yet bid -- but this seems of little benefit for all of the problems that the jump shift otherwise creates.

I have noticed many declarers on this site deliberately play a sequence of cards in the closed hand from the bottom up. For example, with declarer holding AKQJx, the declarer seems frequently to lead from the closed hand by playing J; or, if the suite is led from declarer's right-hand opponent, declarer also plays J. This is just one example of many possible cases. I seldom see any benefit for declarer to play this way since in most cases, it simply announces to the opponents the likely quality of declarer's holding in the suite. (Now, I do see a benefit for playing the Q in some instances like this -- potentially to mislead the opponents into thinking that the declarer may not hold the K. However, that is not the type of play that I am talking about.) Even players who, otherwise, seem to play fairly well often follow this practice. Do players on this site have a belief or practice that declarer should play the bottom card from a sequence in the closed hand? If so, why?

SAYC, 5-Card Major Opening. Partner opens 1 ♣ or ♦. I respond 1 ♥. Partner supports by bidding 2 ♥. (No interference.) In my opinion, the 2♥ by partner should promise 4-card support. However, I have observed that many, many players on this board will make that bid with only 3-card support. Sometimes, they even fail to bid a 4-card ♠ suite and support hearts instead with only 3 hearts. When I have asked them not to support me with only 3 cards in that bidding sequence, they reply that their bidding is standard. Certainly it is not standard in any system that I have knowledge of. Is my bidding hopelessly out of date? If so, please explain the logic of supporting with 3 cards when my major suite response only promises 4 cards.